258 Miscellaneous. 



Palaeontologist to the Geological Survey of Canada, and two from 

 the Museum of the Geological Society of London. 



After giving a brief notice of the deposits from which the nodules 

 containing these crustacean fossils have been derived, and the authors 

 who have written upon them, Dr. Woodward describes (1) a new 

 Callianassa, which he names Callianassa Whiteavesii ; (2) an 

 anomalous Brachyuran, which he names Homohpsis Richardsoni ; 

 (3) a new Corystid, named Palceocorystes Harveyi ; and (4) a new 

 Cancer, named Plagiolopihus vancouverensis. 



2. ' On a Fossil Octopus, Calais Newboldi (J. de C. Sby., MS.), 

 from the Cretaceous of the Lebanon.' By Henry Woodward, LL.D., 

 F.R.S., P.G.S. 



The specimen to which the Author's attention was obligingly 

 drawn by Mr. C. Davies Sherborn, F.G.S., is in the Museum of the 

 Geological Society ; it was obtained by Major T. J. Newbold, and 

 named in 1846 in MS. by the late Mr. J. de Carle Sowerby, Calais 

 Newboldi i, who added on the label: — ' Ceph. Octopoda. Genus in- 

 editum. Abdomen alis triangularibus instructum. E strato calcareo 

 tertiario Montis Libani a D. Newbould effossum. — 1846. J. de Carle 

 Sowerby.' 



The Author describes the specimen in detail, and retains for it 

 the genus and species proposed by Mr. Sowerby, only correcting the 

 spelling of the discoverer's name and the age of the bed, which is 

 Cretaceous, not Tertiary. 



MISCELLANEOUS. 



The imputed Jealousy of European Workers on Australasian Faunas 

 by Local Writers. By C. Hedley, F.L.S. 



Referring to the controversy in the last August and October 

 numbers of thi3 Magazine, touching the synonymy of Rhysota 

 Armiti, I can readily accept the decision of Mr. Smith, since he has 

 the advantage over me of consulting a figure. While the identity 

 of a species may be held a trifling matter, his concluding remark 

 that American and Australian naturalists jealously resent the inter- 

 ference of European writers with their respective local fauna, touches 

 on a topic so large and important that I would crave space to discuss 

 it further. 



W T hen such interference takes the shape of the splendid ' Chal- 

 lenger ' monographs it is received most thankfully ; but when it 

 comes to us, as it often does — I am, of course, not now alluding to 

 Mr. Smith — in papers ignoring Australian or American literature, 

 without, or with mistaken, reference to geographical, geological, 

 and other environment necessary to the proper appreciation of the 

 subject, and presenting data insufficient for the recognition of the 

 species dealt with, then we may be ungrateful without being jealous. 

 Even resentment may be provoked by the flippant manner in which 

 Australian and some American work is received, no matter how 



